20101229

Over the past weeks and months I've been hearing more and more about this Julian Assange person. Some think hes a reckless troublemaker merely trying to stir shit up, while others see him as the only true media source. I'm somewhere in between, though I lean towards the latter. Enough generalities, though, how about some specifics.

His release of the diplomatic cables regarding North Korea.

I view this like I viewed the koran burning. The act, in and of itself, is unrelated to the reaction. I don't particularly see the purpose of ACTUALLY burning a koran, but the reaction of many muslims was, in my humble opinion, the real message on display. Their childish, violent response demonstrated not a problem with said pastor, but a problem with the practitioners of islam. I see a parallel in this with the leak of the diplomatic cables mentioned above. The fact that North Korea reacted like a petulant child can't be blamed on wikileaks, that responsibility rises and falls under the roof it originates under.

His release of the afghan papers.

I saw this as borderline irresponsible on his part, and ultimately irresponsible on the part of whoever leaked them. I completely understand the argument that Julian should have edited out the names, and agree. I would also suggest that the source should have taken it upon himself to do so prior to releasing anything. I further suggest that this type of information should be kept far more secure. However, any organisation, like the Taliban, that declares intent to hunt down and kill informants a la mafia is probably sour to begin with. Not that anyone is running low on reasons to dislike the Taliban...

His whole...thing...in general.

This is what worries me, and perhaps it's just my inherent cynicism. He, or at least his site, is in a position of authority. There couldn't be a more able platform for bait-and-switch than this. He releases tons of documents, secret information that isn't questioned merely because of the obvious outrage from the supposed protectors of this information. It's all valid...for now. Whats stopping him from releasing fabricated documents to serve an heretofore unexpressed agenda? Freedom of press and "need to know" is all well and good, but I don't trust anything that doesn't have 'greed' written all over it. Does your insurance company really want to sell you insurance? Absolutely, thats how they make their money. Notice, however, that not a single insurance ad touts the number of PAID claims. Subscribers, rebates, money saved, etc., but no one talks about the numbers that matter, when you NEED insurance. This makes sense, fiscally, and I can trust an insurance company to sell me insurance, and refuse to pay my claim. That screams greed. Wikileaks screams incoming let-down. I hope I'm wrong, but I plan on being very skeptical of anything coming from there.